but you cannot paint them as the villain if they challenge what would appear to be unlawful behaviour - I would do the same if I saw someone hopping over a fence

You are of course absolutely right and if the owner of property A (who we get on very well with by the way) or the owner of the field told us to stop then I would hold my hands up and say 'ok, no problem, sorry, won't do it again'.

The short answer is no - the fence either belongs to A, or more likely the field owner.

Field owner.

I'm assuming the sketch is a very simplified version of the layout of the properties for the purpose of this thread, but I'm struggling to understand how you as D, can have a boundary dispute with B, when your lands don't adjoin

Very simplified example with a slight jiggling of letters and right and left sides. Dream house turned into a nightmare.

but you cannot paint them as the villain if they challenge what would appear to be unlawful behaviour - I would do the same if I saw someone hopping over a fence

You are of course absolutely right and if the owner of property A (who we get on very well with by the way) or the owner of the field told us to stop then I would hold my hands up and say 'ok, no problem, sorry, won't do it again'.

Thanks,Vol.

how likely that they'll challenge you will depend on the characters involved - for instance, a quiet vulnerable individual living alone is unlikely to challenge an aggressive/intimidating individual or even quiet/unassuming individual if they have a volatile family in tow, or they may have been beaten into submission by an entirely different situation and lack the energy/will to challenge.

bottom line, you know you're doing something wrong so you know you shouldn't do it and it shouldn't take a telling off for you to find a lawful way to get to the footpath.

bottom line, you know you're doing something wrong so you know you shouldn't do it and it shouldn't take a telling off for you to find a lawful way to get to the footpath.

Talking myself into jail with this one Mac I can see but totally agree.

Neighbour A is no shrinking violet though, very forthright and has no qualms in putting the world to rights and as for the farmer who owns the field, he has people zig-zagging all over that field, on and off the footpath, to get to horses in adjacent fields, it's all very open and communal, like the rest of our village, it really is a nice friendly village. The kids have built an amazing den in the hedge behind the houses which has been there for over a year now. In my view, no one has a problem with any of it other than property B, and only because of the position of the dispute we found ourselves in.

I wouldn't ignore any complaints from the farmer or the owner of A if either of them said anything though, totally within their rights.

Hi again. Sorry to drag this one back but what if I suddenly became the owner of the property that the drive belongs to? What would be my rights regarding the part of this fence that would span my boundary at the top of my new drive? I'm not talking about hopping over it any more but more looking at it with regard to not wanting our NFH to try and claim any rights over our potential new boundary as I suspect they will.

Volumiza has access to a private lane. The lane runs between a public road, and a field. There is a public(?) footpath in the field. The end of the lane is fenced.

Volumiza indicates that he has access to the full length of the lane, but according to his map, he does not need access along the lane beyond his plot of land.

Question 1 ... Is Volumisa wrong in believing he has access to the end of the lane? If he is right, what was the purpose of giving him access to the end of the lane. I suggest it was to give him access to the public (?) footpath in the field.

Question 2 ... Was the lane in existence, with access to the public (?) footpath, before the now dilapidated fence was erected? Does that raise a question about whether the gardens fronting the lane have a prescriptive easement allowing them to access the public(?) footpath via the lane.

Question 3 ... Can a prescriptive easement be gained by climbing OVER a dilapidated fence.

Volumiza has access to a private lane. The lane runs between a public road, and a field. There is a public(?) footpath in the field. The end of the lane is fenced.

Volumiza indicates that he has access to the full length of the lane, but according to his map, he does not need access along the lane beyond his plot of land.

Question 1 ... Is Volumisa wrong in believing he has access to the end of the lane? maybe If he is right, what was the purpose of giving him access to the end of the lane. I suggest it was to give him access to the public (?) footpath in the field.

Question 2 ... Was the lane in existence, with access to the public (?) footpath, before the now dilapidated fence was erected? more than likely not Does that raise a question about whether the gardens fronting the lane have a prescriptive easement allowing them to access the public(?) footpath via the lane.no it doesn’t

Question 3 ... Can a prescriptive easement be gained by climbing OVER a dilapidated fence.no - climbing over the fence would be considered ‘by force’

Volumiza has access to a private lane. The lane runs between a public road, and a field. There is a public(?) footpath in the field. The end of the lane is fenced.

I won't have access to a private lane, I will own a drive that 2 other properties have rights of way over and forget the footpath, this isn't about me hopping over a fence to take a 12 metre shortcut across a field.

jonahinoz wrote:Volumiza indicates that he has access to the full length of the lane, but according to his map, he does not need access along the lane beyond his plot of land.

As earlier explained, my map is a very simplified version of how the land lies, I didn't want to reveal too much due to being in a legal dispute regarding an adverse possession claim.

jonahinoz wrote:Question 1 ... Is Volumisa wrong in believing he has access to the end of the lane? If he is right, what was the purpose of giving him access to the end of the lane. I suggest it was to give him access to the public (?) footpath in the field.

The access along my drive will be to access my new garden. Others use it to access theirs. No problem.

jonahinoz wrote:Question 2 ... Was the lane in existence, with access to the public (?) footpath, before the now dilapidated fence was erected? Does that raise a question about whether the gardens fronting the lane have a prescriptive easement allowing them to access the public(?) footpath via the lane.

No access to the public and it is not a lane. The fence was put up by one neighbor but it spanned two properties and beyond the limts of their own property. I am simply asking if the person who erected the fence over my new property will have any rights over my boundary just because they put a fence up that stretched beyond their boundary? Can I order it to be taken down? After being in dispute with these people I do not want them claiming any rights over any other part of my property. It is not a boundary I share with them, I share it with a farmer. They just decided to fence the whole stretch of boundary and now claim complete ownership of the fence.

jonahinoz wrote:Question 3 ... Can a prescriptive easement be gained by climbing OVER a dilapidated fence.

MacadamB53 wrote:.............. but you cannot paint them as the villain if they challenge what would appear to be unlawful behaviour - I would do the same if I saw someone hopping over a fence...

you didn't quite confirm whether you have permission from the owner of the field to climb over his fence and/or to cut across his field as if you owned it?

The main issue is who owns the fence - even more so in terms of recent developments. Comments like the above are distinctly unhelpful in trying to establish that.

who owns the fence? I do - now what?

I can't explain more Mac but they've started hanging things along the fence on the bit that stretches across my boundary. Behaving like they own the whole stretch of fence, therefore the whole boundary.

Volumiza wrote:Hi again. Sorry to drag this one back but what if I suddenly became the owner of the property that the drive belongs to? What would be my rights regarding the part of this fence that would span my boundary at the top of my new drive? I'm not talking about hopping over it any more but more looking at it with regard to not wanting our NFH to try and claim any rights over our potential new boundary as I suspect they will.

Thanks,Vol

Nothing will change - whatever the situation is now will be the same on completion. If it's determined to be on the field then it's owned by the field owner, if it's determined to be on the drive owners land it will be conveyed to you on completion.

The purpose of a boundary feature is to define, secure and enclose the land of its owner - there is no possibility that the fence erector can claim any ownership of the fence because it neither encloses or abuts land that he owns.

Volumiza wrote:Hi again. Sorry to drag this one back but what if I suddenly became the owner of the property that the drive belongs to? What would be my rights regarding the part of this fence that would span my boundary at the top of my new drive? I'm not talking about hopping over it any more but more looking at it with regard to not wanting our NFH to try and claim any rights over our potential new boundary as I suspect they will.

Thanks,Vol

Nothing will change - whatever the situation is now will be the same on completion. If it's determined to be on the field then it's owned by the field owner, if it's determined to be on the drive owners land it will be conveyed to you on completion.

if it’s “determined” that it is on the drive it needs taking down (and re-erecting on the field if the field owner wants one that is...) so that the entire drive is available for use...

I’ve use speech marks because we’re not discussing a determined boundary.

What if the fence is not on the drive or the farmland? What if it is actually on the boundary? I don't want to sound like I have a vendetta against our neighbours, far from it, we just want to get on with our lives. What I don't want however, is a continuation of the games we have suffered over the last 2 years. I know without shadow of a doubt that they will be claiming, rightly or wrongly, some kind of ownership over that boundary and I want to put a stop to it immediately.

Would I be within my rights to take the fence down and put one of my own up in its place? I know I should be asking a lawyer but our previous dispute has cost us loads of money AND the cost of a wrought iron fence to keep them out of our garden.